tv [untitled] December 12, 2010 10:30am-11:00am PST
trending. supervisor elsbernd: summer of 2011, ok. supervisor avalos: mr. rose, anything else you want to share? >> we did, of course, raise a question as to why this contract is going up 105%, from $8 million to $16.4 million. on the top of page five of our report, we state that we received a memorandum on page one. thethat the justification pertaining to what they referred to as changed physicians is conditions. that is for the requested $8.4 million including emergency
generator projects at the san francisco general hospital as well as other conditions that they have put in writing. we also raised the question of why not conduct a new competitive process. on page 4-5 the patient -- the statement from mr. alameda in his memorandum attachment stated that it would be detrimental to the project given the terms of synergy that would be lost and the impact in scheduling. the additional work impact is best addressed with jacobs as they have become a valuable member of the research team with the data that is to attributable to the savings that we just referenced in the project. for those reasons the responses
to our questions, we recommend approval of this resolution. supervisor avalos: thank you, mr. rose. we can go on to public comment. >> budget and finance committee. ♪ i was filled with despair my dreams turned to ashes now they are gone and i looked at general hospital it was barren and gross without a good hospital in hell i have nothing at all without a good building in good health i have nothing without a
good hospital building i have nothing at all you might have conquered the world you might have millions of dollars without a good building and good health you might have nothing nothing at all ♪ please consider the item. supervisor avalos: ok. any other members of the public? of we will close public comment. colleagues? supervisor mirkarimi: motion. supervisor avalos: taken without objection. mr. young, if you could please call items 5 and 6. >> item #5. resolution approving amendment no. 1 to domestic terminals food and beverage lease no. 03-0178 with lori's diner international; no. 03-0179 with andale airports; no. 03-0181 with meyers holdings, llc; and no. 03-0188 with h. young enterprises, and the city and
county of san francisco, by and through its airport commission. item no. 6. resolution approving the terminal 2 specialty store lease between melshire dfw, l.p. dba natalie's candy jar, and the city and county of san francisco, acting by and through its airport commission. supervisor avalos: welcome. >> thank you. good afternoon. cathy wagner with the san francisco international airport. i will start with item number five, the first modification to four leases allowing for the determination of four security food court locations [listsl stores] in the first terminal.
sales have dropped 20% as a result in changes of tsa regulations and things that you can bring through the security checkpoint that have impacted customer and passenger behavior pretty significantly. the modification would allow for determination that these locations, reducing the food and beverage square footage at the airport by 3500 square feet. the budget analyst has estimated that the loss in revenue is around $400,000 per year. our concessions staff has looked at this and believes strongly that the majority of that money would simply be shifted from pre-security to post-security, more than made up for in the budget with our opening of the
second terminal and all of the new food and beverage concessions that will begin their in the spring of 2011. i would be happy to answer any specific questions you might have. supervisor avalos: thank you. that was both items? >> no. item number six? speaking of turmoil to -- terminal two, this is the last retail and beverage concession program you will approve in terminal two. they will operate a candy concession in the second terminal for approximately 928 square feet. the lease contains a guarantee of $141,000 or a structured percentage of rent based on gross revenues, whichever is greater. this location has already been
through the finance committee and the board and was approved in 2010 as charles chocolates. however, the operator was not able to secure financing. the new lease before you would replace that lease and is the result of a new competitive bid process. supervisor avalos: thank you. mr. rose? >> on item 5, as stated, we had estimated reduce revenues of $418,000. the department states that it will be made up to the tune of about 70%. in any event, because of the airport's break-even policy, and will not have any direct fiscal impact on the airport's. revenues needed will come from the airlines. we recommend approval of that resolution. under item #6 there was a process where nosirdfw had the
highest annual minimum guaranteed to be paid if the gross percentage of sales and we recommend approval of the resolution. supervisor avalos: thank you. we can open these up for public comment. items five and six. >> ♪ lori's diner where are you now fly away from here i do not think so i think that you are here taking our hunger away think of the diner and give it a try. i know that they would like it that way a diner is a friend of a friend who is a friend through
the 50's and that is the kind of place that is. they will be there for you. give the diner a try in the airport. i know that they would wanted that way. ♪ supervisor avalos: seeing no one else, we will close public comment. we have a motion to approve these items with recommendations moving forward? please call item no. 7. and item number 8. >> item #7. ordinance authorizing the san francisco planning department to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $250,000 from the california department of transportation, division of transportation planning for the fy 2010-2011 environmental justice grant for the chinatown broadway streetscape improvement design plan, and amending ordinance no. 191-10
(annual salary ordinance, fy2010-2011) to reflect the addition of one (1) limited duration job class 5293 planner iv, grant funded position (0.06 fte), in the planning department. item #8. ordinance authorizing the san francisco planning department to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $250,000 from the california department of transportation, division of transportation planning, for the caltrans community-based transportation grant for the central corridor growth strategy and design plan, and amending ordinance no. 191-10 (annual salary ordinance, fy2010-2011) to reflect the addition of one (1) limited duration job class 5293 planner iv, grant funded position (0.15 fte), in the planning department. >> good morning, my name is tom desanta with of the planning department. amending the established. of a limited term grant funding,
funding from the grant will be used to develop a vision for the subway rail corridor with an outcome that will produce a growth strategy and design plan that coordinate's support land uses with land use recommendations, urban design guidelines, and enhance public rail. it requires a $27,000 match being per -- provided through the municipal transit agency. item #8 post board approval for accepting and spending grants that amend an established 0.06 limited term grant fund physician. the planning department applied for this grant in partnership with community development centers. funding for the grant will be used to develop a streetscape improvements designed plan for revitalization of the former
freeway corridor that was knocked down. the goal of the plan is to develop and design commercial corridors that encourage job, housing, transportation linkage, fostering and modeling on merchants that are under- represented in transportation planning with developed community partnerships in alternative modes to reduce carbon footprints and greenhouse gas emissions. this grant has a matching requirement of 16,000 coming from the planning department and the chinatown committee development center and $33,000 from the mta. staff and planning of parliament are here to answer any questions you might have. supervisor avalos: thank you for the presentation. public comment?
items 7 and 8. >> ♪ i see you walking down a street scape in chinatown and it is time the to kick the ball around. this item should be a friend. this item should be a friend. given until the end. fix it up by the city by the bay and that deal will be ok make this item your friend make this item your friend as it includes money and is well spent ♪ supervisor avalos: seeing no other member of the public coming forward, we will close public comments. on these items? moving forward with recommendations?
mr. young, please call items 9, 10, and 11. >> item #9. hearing to consider release of reserved funds, san francisco public utilities commission (fy2007-2008 hetch hetchy capital project budget), in the amount of $1,873,500 to support the costs associated with the implementation of the community choice aggregation plan by early 2011. item number 10. resolution authorizing an amendment to the san francisco public utilities commission contract cs- 915r for sunol valley regional construction management services in the amount not to exceed $ 3,000,000, for a total agreement not to exceed amount of $19,000,000 to fund construction management services for bioregional habitat restoration actions required for various water system improvement program projects within the sunol valley region, alameda county, pursuant to charter section 9.118, and adopting findings pursuant to the california environmental quality act. item number 11.
resolution authorizing an amendment to the san francisco public utilities commission contract no. cs- 916 for peninsula regional construction management services in the amount not to exceed $ 4,000,000, for a total agreement not to exceed amount of $26,000,000 to fund construction management services for bioregional habitat restoration actions required for various water system improvement program projects within the peninsula region, san mateo county, pursuant to charter section 9.118, and adopting findings pursuant to the california environmental quality act. supervisor avalos: welcome. >> thank-you, chairman. supervisors. my name is michael campbell. i am not prepared to speak on item #9, the release of reserve for continuing being cca program. i know the to have a full agenda. my office did provide a report
as described and requested by the budget analyst to your office yesterday to discuss that. if you do not wish to have that discussion, maybe i can move on to item 10 or 11. supervisor avalos: please provide a brief summary of this item and we will go on to mr. rose, it will be handled separately. >> very good. what has been requested is the remaining balance of 1,873,500 for the moving forward of the program in 2011. as supervisors low -- most likely no we issued an rfp this
year and we did receive responses and was asked to affect the bids in the questions that we thought were more important. those responses were due on september 10. those funds fall into two broad categories. the first is the negotiation efforts that we will undertake with the highest ranking firms. the second is doing the outreach efforts that we think will be important to the community, of provided to every customer in the program as well as general
marketing when we thought we would get an onslaught from the incumbent utility. saying things that are not necessarily true. so, the budget analysts office as i understand it has recommended the release of funds for those negotiations but not for the opt out process. from our perspective that would just require us coming back again and asking for another release of reserves. in terms of operations moving forward we do not have a problem as it is presented. supervisor avalos: thank you. mr. rose? >> on page nine-nine of the report be pointed out that the issue was selected tuesday rfp for a selection of an -- of a
service provider in 2010. mr. campbell reports that on november 3, they did submit proposals and planned to evaluate those proposals to select the energy provider. we stated on page 10 of our report in the recommendations, we have three. the first is that we recommend you reduce the amount from 1,000,873500, covering the estimated cost of the city attorney's office for budget negotiations to select preferred energy service providers. second is that the balance should continue to be reserved by the budget and finance committee pending board of supervisors approval and a new contract between the city and
selected energy provider to operate the aggregation program pending the provision of the budget and finance committee with background and experience on the selected energy provider and details on how the program will be implemented with an announcement of renewable energy proposal rates and a total program costs with financial liability issues. so, the total was placed on reserve. that was pending the status report on the program. as of the writing of that report we have not seen that status report. they have not submitted it to the board of supervisors but we did just receive something today and i would say that the committee is satisfied with that report. we would recommend the release of the $430,000.
if the committee is not satisfied, we consider this a policy issue for the board. supervisor avalos: supervisor? supervisor mirkarimi: mr. campbell? did this matter come before the puc commission? >> no, it did not appear supervisor mirkarimi: you are aware -- you know, it did not. supervisor mirkarimi: you are aware of the meeting this friday? >> yes. supervisor mirkarimi: why was this matter brought to us now when it was not released or analyzed by it their own commission coming out this friday? >> it is just the way the wheels work, as i am learning. i had sought to get those funds released several months ago. so that we would be in a good place. i was thinking along the
timeline of what be expected to have back on november 3. as you know, the negotiation process is 1 maketh, if the last round was any indication, is a 60 hour per week effort. i wanted to make sure that i was being prudent and that funds were released in advance. there were many questions from the budget analysts office. it has taken two months to get here. we had thought this would be handled previously. supervisor mirkarimi: understood. i appreciate the fact that in this go around we have companies like shell, tempura, constellation, our choice, well stella >> that is them. supervisor mirkarimi: it requires a certain amount of -- who else?
>> that is them. supervisor mirkarimi: it takes a certain amount of processing, i understand. but as prudent as they would like to advance in funds to assist in that endeavor we do not have to plan ourselves as the budget analysts reported. the report was submitted yesterday and today. i would rather not release the 1.8 -473,000 in its entirety right now. i would like to release part of that. one of you tried to strike a figure that works for you. >> a number less than what the
budget analyst is suggesting? per my opening remarks, we can make that work. supervisor mirkarimi: strictly $430,000. >> we will need to have the full court press for marketing. but in terms of making sure we have the resources that we need with a contract that works -- supervisor mirkarimi: what is the bottom line that you can live with? >> it is hard to judge what is going to be involved in a negotiation process before i even know what the final package looks like. the way that i would characterize it is that my best guess on what it would cost is that some number of lower than that, if we see that we are running up against the limit of the budget by would need become back to this body to seek additional release. that is just a staffing
resources issue based on the number of times we want to come back. supervisor mirkarimi: we get that it is a chore. >> it is perfectly fine and part of the oversight role and we are not suggesting otherwise. supervisor mirkarimi: to get through this, when would you have to be back here again to get the remainder? >> the remainder, as i understand in the budget analysts office recommendation, we would come back for that at the time when we had a contract that was firm but with that the supplier. that would go towards marketing efforts and we would probably want to begin to keep the wheels moving so that there is no delay and start actually working on the process of that release as we were 90% of the way they're so that once the contract was
drafted we will already have the wheels in motion for speaking with customers. supervisor mirkarimi: conditional to the idea of the two will satisfy the setting of the existing bettors right now, i would like to add to the menu of bidders. we have asked this before. it needs to assign itself potential bidders, which is themselves. in the vein of the puc, how can they carry out the actual facility ave third-party company. not just the private sector. my fear is a drawdown on the dollar's before us on companies that may not materialize in the way that we would like. we would therefore have exhausted the funds that we have
on this repartee that we are going through now. what do we have to show for it? other than going through the drill. part of the bases in this particular case is that we need to be party to the question -- what can we do that the company cannot? supervisor mirkarimi: yes, i believe that that is part of the meeting agenda for this friday. supervisor mirkarimi: friday i will expect that that is what will be given a rest as well? giving the release for this, it has to be part of the question for future reserve releases. i want to know what the pic's role in this is. what you as a potential actor can be in case no company meets
our standards. >> very good. supervisor avalos: we can open this item for public comment. >> ♪ joy to the water world july 8 to bringing it to the center of the world joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea joy and bring it to the puc july 8 to the water world joy and bring us in a big water world joy to the fishes in this deep blue sea bring this item to you and money ♪ supervisor mirkarimi: please
step up. >> good morning, commissioners. matthew, "in those days john the baptist came to judea because the kingdom of heaven was coming. from that time jesus began to preach and say repent because the kingdom of heaven is and hand. bear with me. if you confess and believe that god has raised you, you will be saved. corinthians, 12-3. supervisor avalos: sorry, is this referencing the release reserve? >> yes, sir.